There is no doubt that my life has taught me that women are tough. My mom was tough, my sister is tough, my wives, past and present, are all tough.

History teaches us that women do most of the actual work in the world, and if you don’t think women are tougher than men, try having a baby.
That said, have we lost our evidently androgenized minds?

War is one of life’s activities that men created, along with religion and barbecues, in order to have something important to do since women already took care of most of the actual necessities of getting through the day. Now we have the military-industrial complex designating women as combat troops.

If we are looking to further legitimize war as a national strategy, maybe body bags with our mothers, sisters, wives and friends as occupants will enhance that effort.

Rocky Hill, Denver

This letter was published in the Jan. 26 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here[2]. Follow eLetters[3] on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

First of all the ‘military-industrial complex’ didn’t declare that “all men are created equal”, that was the Constitution. Second, if you only pay lip-service to equality and don’t embrace it, you are a second-rate believer in the democratic republic we call the United States of America. Women are just as capable as men, at EVERYTHING. To indicate otherwise shows less respect for the women in your life that you claim to have such deep respect for.

Equality is not now, nor will it ever be, something you can claim to embrace, and then embrace it piecemeal. I commend our nation for taking a huge step towards embracing true equality, and I suggest that if you do not want to do a military job, whether you are male or female, then don’t join the military.

#2 Comment By peterpi On January 25, 2013 @ 8:10 pm

A more condescending patronizing, paternalistic view of womankind I have never read in my entire life, and I’ve seen some doozies.

“A woman’s place is in the home”
“Kirch, hinder, kuchen.”
God help us all.

#3 Comment By DR On January 25, 2013 @ 8:49 pm

Dear Rocky Hill, Welcome to the world of equality that you and your fellow past and present, modern day feminists have so valiantly fought for.

I believe the letter writer is a man, but I agree. Your last sentence is why I can’t and never will take “modern feminists” seriously.

#5 Comment By peterpi On January 25, 2013 @ 9:06 pm

And you know this, how?
BTW, the author is a man.

#6 Comment By peterpi On January 25, 2013 @ 9:09 pm

Sarah Palin is a modern feminist.
Michelle Machmann is a moden feminist, and during her campaign, she was met with Christian ministers telling their flock not to vote for her because she wanted to usurp male headship.
Any woman who takes on condescending males to fight for a job or position that men take for granted is a feminist.
I can’t help it if you buy the bilge dealt out by Rush Limbaugh and Co.

#7 Comment By GregoryR On January 25, 2013 @ 9:10 pm

Actually it was the the Declaration of Independence that declared that “all men are created equal” but who’s keeping track?

#8 Comment By Dano2 On January 25, 2013 @ 9:14 pm

We teach our daughter that those who don’t take you seriously are easier to defeat.

Best,

D

#9 Comment By DR On January 25, 2013 @ 9:47 pm

Peterpi, I think he meant that many women and particularly many feminists don’t want women to fight in combat units or have to register with the selective service (and thus part of the draft pool). Therefore, the special privilege is in being exempt from it. Feminists, particularly the ones I’ve dealt with say they fight for equality. But often that “equality” is one sided. Modern feminists counter with the idea that women don’t start wars, therefore why should they have to fight them? (part of the “male patriarchy” that is central to feminist doctrine). Feminists say they fight for equality, yet they’re absolutely silent when addressing the divorce laws that favor women, domestic abuse laws that favor women, child custody laws that favor women and so on…

Do I support equality in the sense that women should be able to do any job that a man can do if they want to? Yep! Do I support equal pay for equal work? Yep! Do I support a womans right to abortion? Yep! Do I think women are inferior to men in any way, shape or form? Nope! That kind of “feminism” I support 100%. But thats not the feminism I’m referring to and certainly not the feminism that is being put forth by many leading the current feminist movement.

And just to be clear, I actually agree with your first post.

Not sure what Rush Limbaugh has to do with anything. I think the last time I ever heard his voice was when he was on tv in the early 90s. But then again, this isn’t the first time you’ve more or less accused me of being a lock step Republican. I’m not. I quit being a Republican years ago. Do I support some conservative ideas? Yep! Do I support some liberal ones? Yep!

#10 Comment By DR On January 26, 2013 @ 4:08 am

Dano, when I say I don’t take them seriously I am referring to their ideas and beliefs. Not the people that assert and support them. Much the same way that I don’t take creationism/intelligent design seriously.

#11 Comment By Happy Jack On January 26, 2013 @ 4:50 am

Having served in the infantry I have no problems with them doing away with the ban on women to serve in combat arms as long as they also do away with the dual standards of physical fitness. To join a front line unit they should be required to pass the same physical standards, as equals, to the men they will serve with. And there should be NO watering down of the standards to accommodate the women.

#12 Comment By GregoryR On January 26, 2013 @ 7:31 am

The proof will be in the pudding when the draft is opened and women are required to register with the selective service (which seems the logical outcome of this). If feminists squirm your point, one I’m not in total disagreement with, will be well taken.

#13 Comment By Old Enough On January 26, 2013 @ 8:19 am

It would be a good idea to register both men and women and then draft them both. When all are at risk, the risk of war might diminish. BTW, I have been a feminist for about 45 years.

#14 Comment By TLC On January 26, 2013 @ 10:44 am

Of course, I suspect one reason for so many wars is that it’s men, not women, who are usually sacrificed. When women are sacrificed in the thousands, I suspect we will be more selective about the wars we engage in. That would be a good thing, IMHO.

#15 Comment By TLC On January 26, 2013 @ 10:46 am

One can hope, but I suspect the requirements will be watered down for women, as the military already does this.

#16 Comment By holyreality On January 26, 2013 @ 10:54 am

Those “men” in the DOI were actually “white men who owned property”.

#17 Comment By GregoryR On January 26, 2013 @ 11:53 pm

And your point? I said nothing about the status of the signers of the Declaration. I only corrected a misattribution.
Anyway, just because those that signed it were wealthy landowners doesn’t mean that the principle is incorrect. Unless of course you believe some people are created less equal. Then again based on your corpus of posts one might be lead to believe that you hold that all people are created equal while some are created more equal than others.

#18 Comment By GregoryR On January 26, 2013 @ 11:55 pm

I agree that both sexes should be enrolled. I’m skeptical that enrolling women will lower the chances of wars breaking out.
Feminists come in different stripes and no one group IMHO has a monopoly on ideas with in the movement.

#19 Comment By GregoryR On January 27, 2013 @ 1:35 am

And your point? I said nothing about the status of the signers of the Declaration. I only corrected a misattribution. Anyway, just because those that signed it were wealthy landowners doesn’t mean that the principle is incorrect. Unless of course you believe some people are created less equal. Then again based on your corpus of posts one might be lead to believe that you hold that all people are created equal while some are more equal than others.

#20 Comment By GregoryR On January 27, 2013 @ 1:35 am

I agree that both sexes should be enrolled. I’m skeptical that enrol long women will lower the chances of wars breaking out. Feminists come in different stripes and no one group IMHO has a monopoly on ideas with in the movement.

#21 Comment By Jiddou On January 27, 2013 @ 8:36 am

The issue for me has always been worrying about what happens to women soldiers who are taken prisoner. A lot of the bad guys don’t adhere to the tenets of the Geneva Convention…

#22 Comment By jayreadyjay On January 27, 2013 @ 9:09 am

Israel had women in combat back in the beginning of their country, but changed policy. It turned out that the Arabs would fight to the death rather than surrender to combat units with women in them. This was not an issue of equality but of practicality.

#23 Comment By Robtf777 On January 27, 2013 @ 1:59 pm

Truly, truly, truly, truly……our nation has reached “true gender equality”…..when American women can be sacrificed on battlefields on the other side of the world…..fighting on the ground in some other country in some other country’s war……in a war that has questions as to the results that are hoped to be achieved and that can be achieved and that will be achieved….both in the short-term and the long-term……thus assuring that far fewer…..men…..will have to die in stupid wars like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghan.